Skip to main content
Glama

DC Hub — Data Center Site Selection & Colocation: Electricity, Power Grid, Gas, Fiber

by cloud.dchub

Get Disaster Risk

get_disaster_risk
Read-onlyIdempotent

Use when a user wants the natural-hazard / disaster risk for a lat/lon — flood, wildfire, hurricane, earthquake, heat, drought, tornado, etc. Grounded in the FEMA National Risk Index (NRI), the authoritative US county-level hazard dataset (live query, never estimated; points outside US NRI coverage return coverage=unavailable). Example: get_disaster_risk lat=33.45 lon=-112.07. Returns {disaster_risk:{composite_score (0-100, higher=worse), rating (Very Low..Very High), national_percentile}, hazards:{Wildfire, Hurricane, Earthquake, Heat Wave, ...: rating}, top_hazards:[{hazard, rating}], coverage (validated|unavailable), source, caveats}. County-level resolution. For chronic water stress use get_water_risk; for one blended site verdict use get_composite_site_score.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
latNoSite latitude in decimal degrees (-90 to 90, required), e.g. 33.45
lngNoAlias for lon — either name works
lonNoSite longitude in decimal degrees (-180 to 180, required), e.g. -112.07
latitudeNoAlias for lat — either name works
longitudeNoAlias for lon — either name works

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
quotaNoCaller quota state (remaining calls, tier) when available.
_entityNoPayload class discriminator (e.g. facility|market|iso_grid|queue_results|deal|report|response) — branch on this before parsing the rest.
citationNoMachine-readable citation: how to attribute DC Hub (dchub.cloud) for this payload. Normally an OBJECT {source, url, license, cite_as, retrieved_at}; a bare string is accepted and carries the attribution line itself.
provenanceNoCollection-level provenance block: {source, method, as_of, verification_counts, cite_url_template, license, cite_as}. Quote the verification level when citing.
_front_doorNoIn-band front-door hint (first workflow-entry tool of a session): call plan_query(intent) first for the ordered multi-step plan.
_return_loopNoSuggested next-session delta call (get_changes since=24h) so you pull only what changed.
site_evaluation_handoffNoPre-built follow-up calls (analyze_site / get_water_risk args) when the payload carries coordinates — an array of {tool, parameters, why} entries.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.

  1. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Anotations already mark read-only/idempotent; description adds that it is a live query, never estimated, returns coverage=unavailable outside US NRI, and is county-level. This significantly extends behavioral understanding without contradicting annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is longer than average but every sentence contributes: trigger, data source, example, return contract, resolution, and alternatives. The most important usage info is front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a read-only lookup with 5 alias parameters and an existing output schema, the description covers data provenance, coverage edge case, example call, return shape, resolution, and routing to related tools. No critical operational detail is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Input schema covers all 5 parameters with descriptions and aliases; description provides a concrete example (lat=33.45 lon=-112.07) but does not add substantial semantics beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description opens with a specific trigger ('Use when a user wants the natural-hazard / disaster risk for a lat/lon') and enumerates hazard types. It also contrasts with sibling tools by naming get_water_risk and get_composite_site_score, so it is unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use and gives two alternatives with conditions ('For chronic water stress use...; for one blended site verdict use...'). Also delimits application to US NRI coverage, telling the agent what to expect outside that area.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All DC Hub — Data Center Site Selection & Colocation: Electricity, Power Grid, Gas, Fiber toolsInspect
Try in Browser
RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.8/5.0
Disambiguation1/5

With 85 tools, several families are heavily overlapping: semantic_search and search_intelligence are explicitly documented as the same retrieval with different call shapes, save_site and save_to_shortlist both persist sites, and list_saved_sites and get_shortlist both read saved sites. Additionally, site scoring is split across analyze_site, get_composite_site_score, score_facility, and rank_sites, making correct tool selection very difficult for an agent.

Naming Consistency3/5

All names are snake_case and mostly readable, but conventions are mixed: many use get_* (get_facility, get_grid_intelligence), others use verb phrases (analyze_site, compare_isos, rank_markets), and some are bare noun phrases (ai_capacity_index, hyperscaler_deals, grid_transition_radar, site_selection_canvas). The search family alone uses search, search_facilities, semantic_search, and search_intelligence with no consistent pattern.

Tool Count1/5

85 tools is an extreme count for any MCP server, far beyond the 3-15 well-scoped range and above the 50+ threshold described as an extreme mismatch. Even with a wide domain like data-center siting, this many tools overwhelms agent context and makes selection costly.

Completeness4/5

The domain surface is exceptionally broad: siting, grid, gas, fiber, water, climate, tax, permitting, deals, news, facilities, saved shortlists, alerts, webhooks, key management, and research dossiers are all covered with connected workflows. Minor gaps exist, such as no delete or update for saved sites and no pause/resume for standing intents, but these are workable rather than blocking.

Resources